Doing it Ridiculous

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

rmannix:
I'm advocating that in both situations described above that ditching the weights would have been preferred. Neither could have got that deep without air, unless they were busy trying to turn their air on.
Its wasted precious time in these 2 situations.

I frequently dive 2 hose regulators. Performance is severely diminished wearing the tank high enough to reach the valves. Doing a lot of photography I like to look up without the 1st stage hitting me in the head. Wearing the rig that high also makes it likely to get banged/snagged in an overhead environment.

Though you do as you wish, I would contend that ditching weights is, in every situation underwater, the last resort. Reaching our valves is faster. If it is not then we have something wrong (i.e.. tanks too low, flexibility issues..) that should be rectified.

I would also contend that if the equipment we choose to use hampers our ability to achive maximum safety perhaps it is time to rethink the equipment not omit skills that can only serve to enhance our safety.

If we are in an overhead environment and cannot reach our valves we have no business there as we certainly were not trained for the said environment. A requiset skill for any overhead is that we are able to perform a proper valve drill. AFAIK there is no training for overheads that does not require us to be able to do this... maybe cavern?

Just my 2 cents

As a side thought... overhead in singles... is that how I'm reading this?
 
herman:
The really sad part is the REAL GUE guys I have met and had the pleasure of diving with were some of the nicest guys I have ever met. Darn fine divers too. While I am not DIR by any means, I do think it's a pitty these DIR wannabes give the real deal such a bad reputation.


Herman
GUE- DIR-F July 2002
Since I was with hermon in this class .I have to agree 100% they have always been very nice to me and exclelent divers.and NOT PUSHY.
 
rmannix:
I'm advocating that in both situations described above that ditching the weights would have been preferred. Neither could have got that deep without air, unless they were busy trying to turn their air on.
Its wasted precious time in these 2 situations.

I can turn my gas on much faster than I can dump a weightbelt. I was doing a valve drill the other night and my backup had been crushed by a tank earlier and was breathing a little wet ("if this gets any worse I'm going to choke and drown" kind of wet) and I had my long hose back in my mouth and my right post back on in well under a second. Its amazing how fast you can spin that valve on when it is all that is standing between you and a reliable breathing gas supply at depth... Problem immediately solved. No need to ditch a weightbelt and swim up from 10 or 20 feet (or more if you fumble the release) to the surface.
 
I had my long hose back in my mouth and my right post back on in well under a second.


Really
 
rmannix:
United States Navy.


Rich,, im sorry to have to tell you this, but you obviously learned NOTHING, while in the Navy. Now stop trying to win an arguement with gods! you will only anger them!
 
JeffG:
I think there is a need. We should protect those pagans that haven't be enlightened enough to remove the burden of the snorkel.

People wearing their snorkels in positions clearly indicating they have no intention of using them (ie: keeper attached to a BCD ring, on back of mask strap, on side but twisted away from the wearer, duct taped *anywhere*, the more awkward to reach the better), are only carrying to appease an instructor/DM/PADI buddy, and have no desire to spend more money on a folding snorkel since they just got the cheapest one they could find anyways (possibly dollar store), only count for half points.
 
dbg40:
Rich,, im sorry to have to tell you this, but you obviously learned NOTHING, while in the Navy. Now stop trying to win an arguement with gods! you will only anger them!

Interesting statement. I admit to knowing very little about navy underwater overhead environment training so maybe one of you non-gods would like to tell us something about it...specifically why they don't teach you to be able to poorate your own valves and how they address that potential need. Speaking for myself, all my dive training has been in the civilian sector and IANTD, TDI and the NACD all insisted that I be able to reach and work my own valves. I for one would be more than interested in hearing about what the Navy teaches about cave diving or wreck penetration using scuba that these other agencies are missing because everything Rich stated about diving in overhead environments is inconcistant with all of my training.

From what little I've seen and seen and read about military diving, I didn't get the impression that they used open circuit scuba much other than for early training in the pool. If they have training that covers diving in caves or wrecks under similar conditions and using simlar equipment to what a sport diver would use, I'd love to hear about that too.

I look forewar to it.
 
"I've never dived a double hose reg. Could you explain that one? Are you vertical in the water and want the reg lower than the mouthpiece? Diving horizontal gives you more position control (for movement in all directions). Of course that puts the mouthpiece below the reg but that's the way that animal works...they work better upside down? I'm also not much of a photographer but I can look any direction I want while wearing my valves where I can reach them."

I was not going to post in this thread anymore because it has become "strained" but I want to answer your question who ever it was who asked it--lol.

If you have an older Scuba Text from the 60s you will see that there are recommended tank positions. The reason that double hose divers wear their tanks "low" (normal) when compared to "tech" divers is for positioning of the main diaphram. The double hose regulator has the main sense diaphram in that large can that is attached to the tank valve. This differs from a single hose which has the main sense diaphram at the mouth piece. Wearing the tank such that the diaphram is kept closer to the center of the chest decreases the pressure difference between the diaphram and the center of the lungs. Since most divers, even swimming level/horozontal are actually swimming sliightly at an upward angle this also helps to lower the position of the diaphram relative to the center of the lungs. Properly positioning the regulator greatly reduces breathing effort. I can, if I were to ever need to, reach around with my hand, lift the tank, and reach the valve BUT I never have had to with a single tank OW dive. In most cases, asssuming some one is not grossly overweighted they should be able to maintain a position on the surface by swimming. I think I droppped a weight belt once when I was about 14 in the pre BC era, I got to far from the boat and the dive club dive master had moved the boat or something and I was getting awfully tired--lol.
Back to the double hose thing and position of the tank. I was always taught to wear the tank with the valve centered between the shoulder blades. I am sure, to some degree this training comes from earlier divers. I tend to be conservative and not jump on every new fad. A good Royal Aqua-Master double hose, properly tuned and set up can accomplish any dive a modern a single hose could and often perform better. Obviously for cave diving or serious wreck diving a long hose and doubles and DIR type configurations with isolated manifolds that can be manipulated during the dive are solid/smart thinking. The last tech type dive I did this season I was running dual single hoses on a single aluminum 80 in a DIRish configuration because my buddy was not familiar enough with a double hose so I did not want to cause him any concern or confusion. Low vizand cold water complicated the dive as well.
I touched on it but the thing about being horozontal in the water, that is the way we were taught before there were BCs. Like I mentioned, when horozontal a diver is actually going to be slightly head high and slightly feet low if well balanced. You may not think so but observe this on your own. Yeah, some people have legs or fins or other reasons their feet float up and you see them looking for ankle weights. The human body just seems to like keeping the head higher than the feet--lol--even if we are talking only a very few inches difference. Most double hose divers swim and rig for a horozontal position. Without a BC, using the body as an aquaplane helps to compensate for being slightly negative, forward speed will produce some slight lift. Yeah, yeah, that may not work so well in a heavy/more complex DIR outfit but it does when all you have is a tank and a regulator. Hope this explanation helps you understand why different tank positions are appropriate for different styles of diving.
Please everyone have a wonderful Thanksgiving, G'day.
N
 
:D Good ol Nemrod, always the gentleman
 
Thanks Nemrod, good explaination. I know a double hose reg is a single stage and how it works mechanically but had no idea how divers were trained in their use.
 

Back
Top Bottom